<nettime> kein mensch digest [porculus, tal]

["nettime's_lonely_crowd" <nettime@bbs.thing.net>]

Re: <nettime> no people.
     "porculus" <porculus@wanadoo.fr>
     Kali Tal <kali@kalital.com>

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

From: "porculus" <porculus@wanadoo.fr>
Subject: Re: [Nettime-bold] Re: <nettime> no people.
Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 17:59:02 +0200

> event, onward: Sondheim's writing is about words, not language.

about symbol and symbolism? and specially among the holly of holly one, the 
animals?
This litanie of a wildlife ubiquiste status quo in west culture is nice 
already in its compilation. second its just negative positioning sound as 
an incantatory accumulation for searching a threshold effect a mass one. 
it's already a great ambition, that was completely in the tradition of the 
symbolism itself
As the structuralism is incapable to speak about contents, but only to bla 
around peripheral i propose you add this dick head of Foucault in this 
never ending bestiary for breaking this so said antropomorphisme..well 
don't imagine I will suggest for him a cross of sewing machine and an 
umbrella on a dissection table I have some more hairy idea as..er..well 
i keep for me.

> Trying to pin down your meaning, here, is like trying
> to hit a blob of mercury with a nail gun.

As the alchemist believe mercury was red inside and we could see it if the 
blob don't reconstitute its silver skin immediately..as mercury is the 
mineral sperm element etc. hope mister you are good gunman for making yours 
such heraldry

> but beyond that, it's all ectoplasm to me.

ectoplasm ? well not so bad

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 09:07:11 -0700
From: Kali Tal <kali@kalital.com>
Subject: Re: <nettime> no people.

Mark Dery, what is your investment in attempting to condemn and 
silence experimental writing and theoretical discourse on nettime? 
We all have our 'd' keys, as well as access to email filters if we 
truly wish to remain untroubled by writing that bores, annoys, or 
offends us.  Who, truly, reads all of the messages posted to nettime 
or, for that matter, any other email list? What is the advantage in 
being prescriptive?

Safire's insistence on the superiority of his language over others' 
language because of its conformity to "acceptable standards" of 
"correct speech" is inextricably tied to his political conservatism. 
It's a useful rhetorical ploy -- ridicule an opponent's grammar and 
sidestep the content of her or his critique. Standardization of 
speech is inherently political, as any history of the development of 
official grammars will reveal. (Dale Spender's work on this is 
particularly interesting.)

The exploration of new concepts requires a period of initially fuzzy 
or "ectoplasmic" language until understanding of the concepts 
solidify (and hence, in Barthes terms, become dull and nauseating) 
and definitions are arrived at by consensus or imposition. These 
explorations require more, rather than less, intellectual work since 
definitions do not rest conveniently in hand but have to be arrived 
at over time. At this level of discourse words and phrases often act 
as simple placeholders for terms that are still evolving towards more 
specific and accurate descriptors. Running around and demanding 
clarity at all stages of discussion is counter-productive.

>Trying to pin down your meaning, here, is like trying
>to hit a blob of mercury with a nail gun.

A nail gun is hardly the tool one should choose to capture mercury. 
You'd be far more successful scooping it into a bottle with a thin 
piece of cardboard. Your choice of metaphors is illustrative of the 
problem with your argument for clarity.  If all you've got is the 
nail gun you will be endlessly frustrated by the fragmentation of the 
mercury into pieces that are smaller and smaller and less easy even 
to hit with a nail.  The same goes for demanding clarity and 
simplicity in experimentations with new concepts and language.

Kali Tal

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission
#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
#  more info: majordomo@bbs.thing.net and "info nettime-l" in the msg body
#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@bbs.thing.net